Weekly Climate and Energy News Roundup

Brought to You by SEPP (www.SEPP.org) The Science and Environmental Policy Project

###################################################

Quote of the Week: If we take into our hand any volume; of divinity or school metaphysics, for instance; let us ask, Does it contain any abstract reasoning concerning quantity or number? No. Does it contain any experimental reasoning concerning matter of fact and existence? No. Consign it then to the flames: For it can contain nothing but sophistry and illusion. David Hume, An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, Section XII (1748)

###################################################

Number of the Week: 3.6° C

###################################################

THIS WEEK:

Trenberth and Fasullo: Last week TWTW linked to a study by Kevin Trenberth and John Fasullo of US National Center for Atmospheric Research that claimed that the most sensitive of the climate models are supported by their research in 10 years of changes in relative humidity. This was widely reported as proof that increasing carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere would cause drastic global warming because increases in water vapor will amplify the effects of increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations (a positive feedback). Without a positive feedback the theoretical warming from a doubling of atmospheric carbon dioxide is only 1.1 deg C (2 deg F).

In his comments, John Christy pointed out that the projections from the most sensitive models are diverging greatly from actual observations. The divergence is statistically significant. Trenberth and Fasullo failed to mention this divergence in their study.

This week, Richard Lindzen sent to TWTW an article by Trenberth and Fasullo that appeared in Geophysical Research Letters on April 14, 2009 titled “Global warming due to increasing absorbed solar radiation.” The main part of the abstract reads:

“There is an increase in net radiation absorbed, but not in ways commonly assumed. While there is a large increase in the greenhouse effect from increasing greenhouse gases and water vapor (as a feedback), this is offset to a large degree by a decreasing greenhouse effect from reducing cloud cover and increasing radiative emissions from higher temperatures. Instead the main warming from an energy budget standpoint comes from increases in absorbed solar radiation that stem directly from the decreasing cloud amounts.”

This is a re-statement of Lindzen’s “Iris Effect”, first published in 2001. Strangely, in the 2009 article Trenberth and Fasullo failed to mention the prior work of Lindzen. Could it be that Lindzen asserts that the iris effect cancels the water vapor feedback? Lindzen’s research indicates that warming from doubling of atmospheric carbon dioxide will be significantly less than the theoretical 1.1 deg C and much less than that projected by the models. Please see links in last week’s TWTW and http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2009/2009GL037527.shtml.

********************

WUWT TV: To counter Al Gore’s Dirty Weather telethon, Anthony Watts had a 24 hour program featuring scientists addressing key scientific issues involving the threat of global warming / climate change. The entire program can be viewed from Anthony’s web site, WUWT. Shortly, individual segments will be available on UTube.

According to some who saw parts of both, Anthony’s program was not as slick as the expensive and expertly produced Gore program. But all too often Hollywood slickness is used to cover-up scientific faults. The Norwegian Nobel Peace Prize Committee, appointed by the Parliament of Norway, should have learned this by now. Please see links under Challenging the Orthodoxy.

*******************

A Note of Thanks: Roger Pielke Sr. is retiring his popular web blog, Pielke Climate Science, to focus on research. Since July 2005, his blog has been a source for valuable information that often did not appear elsewhere. Now, he finds a number of excellent blogs exist and prefers to concentrate on other matters. His comments have always been professional and courteous, a high standard missing in many climate blogs. We are looking forward to the third edition of his modeling book. Please see link under Seeking a Common Ground.

*******************

EIKE – Heartland Conference: As stated above, The Heartland Institute is partnering with the European Institute for Climate and Energy (EIKE) to host a conference on Climate Change in Munich. For details please see the link under Challenging the Orthodoxy.

*******************

BBC Special: The BBC climate scandal continues to unfold. In 2006, BBC announced that based on a panel of experts, it would no longer give equal time to climate change skeptics. As linked in TWTW last week, a lonely British subject, who pays taxes supporting BBC, inquired who was on the panel. He has been thwarted by the BBC and the courts on claims by BBC executives that the panel met only under commonly used conditions of secrecy. This week, a blogger discovered the names of the panel from apparently completely legal and open sources. As expected, few on the panel were climate experts and many were from organizations hostile to use of carbon based fuels. It is sad to witness a once venerable institution, noted for its integrity, headed the way of supermarket tabloids by defending politicized climate science and policy. Please see links under BBC Special.

*******************

Quote of the Week: The quote was used in a lecture at Oxford on science and rhetoric by Mark Thompson in which he criticized the Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF). Mr. Thompson is the former head of the BBC. Apparently, Mr. Thompson does not realize that complex numerical models can be another form of sophistry and illusion – particularly if their assumptions have not been empirically verified, and when the models require updating as observations significantly diverge from predictions. Please see link under Defending the Orthodoxy.

*******************

IEA: The International Energy Administration (IEA) has issued a large study titled World Energy Outlook, 2012. According to the outlook, largely due to deep underground hydraulic fracturing of dense shale and deepwater drilling, by the early 2020s, the US will be producing more oil than Saudi Arabia. Based on its Executive Summary and Fact Sheet, the IEA completely accepts the claims of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) that carbon dioxide emissions are causing unprecedented and dangerous global warming. This may give pause in accepting the IEA claims by those who question the reliability of the IPCC models. Please Article # 2 and links under Energy Issues – Non-US.

*******************

Number of the Week: 3.6° C. Peter Foster writes in the Financial Post: “According to the IEA report, given present consumption trends, the Earth is headed for 3.6C of temperature increase in the “long term.” Just what the long term means is buried in a convoluted and confusing graph on page 247, where it is revealed that that 3.6C is in fact a probability and refers to the year … 2200. Yes, that’s 188 years from now.” Please see link under Energy Issues – Non-US.

###################################################

ARTICLES:

For the numbered articles below please see this week’s TWTW at: http://www.sepp.org. The articles are at the end of the pdf.

[SEPP Comment in the WSJ: Professor Muller’s research could be used to support the research of Professor Lars Franzén of the University of Gothenburg, and others, who state that without carbon dioxide emissions the earth would be entering a new ice age. Why is this trade-off not mentioned?]

[SEPP Comment: Although Professor Vahrenholt states that carbon dioxide is causing warming, in his book, Die kalte Sonne, he asserts that the sun has a major role in climate change – something the IPCC rejects.]

[SEPP Comment: An amusing twist on an alarmist sea level rise study with projections as large as a 5 meter rise. Among the alarmists statements in the study is that by 3000 North African rainfall will get worse (from a study in Nature Geoscience). The Sahara getting rainfall is a bad thing? ]

Using assumptions based on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Assessment Reports, if the U.S. as a whole stopped emitting all carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions immediately, the ultimate impact on projected global temperature rise would be a reduction, or a “savings,” of approximately 0.08°C by the year 2050 and 0.17°C by the year 2100—amounts that are, for all intents and purposes, negligible.

[SEPP Comment: According to the editorial: “the models and the quality of the information that feeds into them have gotten progressively better.” The editorial ignores the fact that there has been no warming for at least a decade.]

[SEPP Comment: Insurance deductibles are larger for a hurricane than a tropical storm, thus labeling Sandy as a tropical storm will benefit those whose properties were damaged. The downside is that a tropical storm does not have the same alarmist tone as a hurricane or super storm.]

[SEPP Comment: What Irony! Many states have instituted “feel good” policies of requiring renewable sources such as wind, for producing electricity. Now, governors of some of these states are realizing that these policies are increasing electricity costs in their states. To off-set these costs, they are demanding greater Federal subsidies for wind power. This action is a clear example that wind power increases the costs of electricity to consumers – so much for free energy. It is time that the states bear the costs of their financially irresponsible “feel-good” policies.]

On the Road Again: On November 28, Fred Singer will be leaving for another lecture tour in Europe. On November 30 he will be speaking at the EIKE Conference in Munich, co-sponsored by Heartland. On December 3, he will be in Geneva giving three talks: luncheon talk to the BSCC, an afternoon talk with the WMO, and an evening talk “The Climate Debate.” On December 5, he give a 3pm open lecture on “Skeptical about Climate Catastrophes” at the Google building in Zurich To RSVP contact Johan Branstroem +41 76 79 89 579. He will give another open talk in Vienna on Dec 7 at 6 pm. To RSVP contact Gabriella Engler at the F. von Hayek Institute. For additional information please contact Ken@SEPP.org.

Post navigation

5 thoughts on “Weekly Climate and Energy News Roundup”

Hmm, David Hume’s quote dies by virtue of its own logic, for that paragraph contains no ‘abstract reasoning concerning quantity or number’ nor in fact any ‘experimental reasoning concerning matter of fact and existence.’

Trenberth and Fasullo: Last week TWTW linked to a study by Kevin Trenberth and John Fasullo of US National Center for Atmospheric Research that claimed that the most sensitive of the climate models are supported by their research in 10 years of changes in relative humidity. This was widely reported as proof that increasing carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere would cause drastic global warming because increases in water vapor will amplify the effects of increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations (a positive feedback).
Only problem is the negative correlation of increasing CO2 vs. reduced RH%.

Quote of the Week: If we take into our hand any volume; of divinity or school metaphysics, for instance; let us ask, Does it contain any abstract reasoning concerning quantity or number? No. Does it contain any experimental reasoning concerning matter of fact and existence? No. Consign it then to the flames: For it can contain nothing but sophistry and illusion. David Hume, An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, Section XII (1748)
——-
So Ken is not impressed by Alec Rawl’s hand waving either.

No Real Scientist will ever be convinced by a negative correlation, zero correlation, or the absence of data. None of the things we’re discussing here is even mildly distracting for the serious people in serious societies doing their important work.

From the mass mailing I received at work today:
~~~~~~~~~~
Zero carbon society speaker series.
The talk this week (Wednesday 21st November) will be give by Jon Coello and David Turner from the Department of Engineering and the Environment, University of Southampton, they will be discussing ‘Carbon Foot-printing’, measurement techniques and examples.
The final session of Michaelmas term (Wednesday 28th November) will be lead by Emma Cross from the Department of Earth Science and the British Antarctic Survey. She will be discussing the effects of Ocean Acidification and possible future scenarios.
All talks begin at 13:10 in the Wordsworth Room, St Johns College and will be followed by a 15 minute discussion session that will finish no later than 13:50.